What do you think?
Rate this book
A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens
The battle of Cowpens was a crucial turning point in the Revolutionary War in the South and stands as perhaps the finest American tactical demonstration of the entire war. On 17 January 1781, Daniel Morgan's force of Continental troops and militia routed British regulars and Loyalists under the command of Banastre Tarleton. The victory at Cowpens helped put the British army on the road to the Yorktown surrender and, ultimately, cleared the way for American independence.
Here, Lawrence Babits provides a brand-new interpretation of this pivotal South Carolina battle. Whereas previous accounts relied on often inaccurate histories and a small sampling of participant narratives, Babits uses veterans' sworn pension statements, long-forgotten published accounts, and a thorough knowledge of weaponry, tactics, and the art of moving men across the landscape. He identifies where individuals were on the battlefield, when they were there, and what they saw--creating an absorbing common soldier's version of the conflict. His minute-by-minute account of the fighting explains what happened and why and, in the process, refutes much of the mythology that has clouded our picture of the battle.
Babits put the events at Cowpens into a sequence that makes sense given the landscape, the drill manual, the time frame, and participants' accounts. He presents an accurate accounting of the numbers involved and the battle's length. Using veterans' statements and an analysis of wounds, he shows how actions by North Carolina militia and American cavalry affected the battle at critical times. And, by fitting together clues from a number of incomplete and disparate narratives, he answers questions the participants themselves could not, such as why South Carolina militiamen ran toward dragoons they feared and what caused the "mistaken order" on the Continental right flank.
<!-- copy for pb
"An exceptionally well-researched and richly detailed treatment of one of the most important battles of the American Revolution.-- Military History of the West
"A superb example of the 'new military history'. . . . Babits comes closer than any previous historian to reconstructing the eighteenth-century soldier's experience of combat and has given us as close to a definitive account of the battle of Cowpens as we are ever likely to have.-- Virginia Magazine of History and Biography
"One of Babits's purposes was the hope that the Cowpens veterans would not be forgotten. The masterful work that he has produced goes far towards achieving that purpose.-- Journal of Southern History
On January 17, 1781, in a pasture near present-day Spartanburg, South Carolina, Daniel Morgan's army of Continental troops and militia routed an elite British force under the command of the notorious Banastre Tarleton. Using documentary evidence to reconstruct the fighting at Cowpens, now a national battlefield, Lawrence Babits provides a riveting, minute-by-minute account of the clash that turned the tide of the Revolutionary War in the South and helped lead to the final defeat of the British at Yorktown. -->
Here, Lawrence Babits provides a brand-new interpretation of this pivotal South Carolina battle. Whereas previous accounts relied on often inaccurate histories and a small sampling of participant narratives, Babits uses veterans' sworn pension statements, long-forgotten published accounts, and a thorough knowledge of weaponry, tactics, and the art of moving men across the landscape. He identifies where individuals were on the battlefield, when they were there, and what they saw--creating an absorbing common soldier's version of the conflict. His minute-by-minute account of the fighting explains what happened and why and, in the process, refutes much of the mythology that has clouded our picture of the battle.
Babits put the events at Cowpens into a sequence that makes sense given the landscape, the drill manual, the time frame, and participants' accounts. He presents an accurate accounting of the numbers involved and the battle's length. Using veterans' statements and an analysis of wounds, he shows how actions by North Carolina militia and American cavalry affected the battle at critical times. And, by fitting together clues from a number of incomplete and disparate narratives, he answers questions the participants themselves could not, such as why South Carolina militiamen ran toward dragoons they feared and what caused the "mistaken order" on the Continental right flank.
<!-- copy for pb
"An exceptionally well-researched and richly detailed treatment of one of the most important battles of the American Revolution.-- Military History of the West
"A superb example of the 'new military history'. . . . Babits comes closer than any previous historian to reconstructing the eighteenth-century soldier's experience of combat and has given us as close to a definitive account of the battle of Cowpens as we are ever likely to have.-- Virginia Magazine of History and Biography
"One of Babits's purposes was the hope that the Cowpens veterans would not be forgotten. The masterful work that he has produced goes far towards achieving that purpose.-- Journal of Southern History
On January 17, 1781, in a pasture near present-day Spartanburg, South Carolina, Daniel Morgan's army of Continental troops and militia routed an elite British force under the command of the notorious Banastre Tarleton. Using documentary evidence to reconstruct the fighting at Cowpens, now a national battlefield, Lawrence Babits provides a riveting, minute-by-minute account of the clash that turned the tide of the Revolutionary War in the South and helped lead to the final defeat of the British at Yorktown. -->
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
87 people are currently reading
389 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
July 21, 2014
Lawrence Babits' Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens is an impressive work of research. Depending heavily upon pension records and first-hand accounts, Babits uncovered aspects of the battle long forgotten or misunderstood. Unfortunately, the incredible detail of the account makes for poor narrative flow. The battle narrative is obscured by the fog of details. Many aspects of the engagement are simply overly-analyzed, such as the long discourse on the number of steps troops took in a certain number of seconds. The book is written in short choppy paragraphs which are awkwardly-paced. It is worthy of Three Stars due to the depth and diligence of the research. As a reader, it isn't captivating, but for a student exploring a key battle of the Revolution it could be a valuable tool.
July 17, 2012
I highly recommend this book as an updated history of the Battle of Cowpens. Although the author spends some time placing the Battle of Cowpens into the larger context of the American Revolution in the South from the British captures of Savannah & Charleston to Yorktown, I recommend that you read "The Road to Guilford Courthouse" to get a better sense of how the Battles of Cowpens and Kings Mountain fit into the bigger picture.
This book is different than previous histories of Cowpens because the author tries to resolve questions like how many soldiers did General Morgan have, how many casualties did the Americans suffer, where were various units located, how did the chronology of the battle unfold, how long did the actual fighting last and why did Tarleton's forces collapse? To do this the author estimates numbers of troops, casualties and who fought at Cowpens from pension records and extrapolates numbers knowing that only a fraction of the soldiers who fought submitted a pension claim. He also uses instruction manuals from the period that specified various marching paces to estimate how far British & American troops could move during key points in the battle. Finally an understanding of the weather, marching conditions and lack of adequate food supplies, in addition to the effects of American rifle and musket fire and cavalry charges is necessary in order to understand why the British collapsed.
So what do we learn from all this? Dan Morgan was a tactical genius. He positioned his troops on the field to utilize marshy areas to protect his flanks and hinder cavalry operations. He positioned some of his lines at the bottom of a swale so that his troops could shoot up at British troops who stood out on the top of the hill against the sky while the British, who tended to shoot too high anyway, would have an even harder time shooting accurately downhill. Morgan arranged his Continental Regular troops so that the militia in front of them could retreat through the gaps in the Continental line to reform behind the Continentals without blocking their line of fire or disrupting their formations. Then the Continentals could close up their ranks after the militia passed through the gaps. The British thought they won the battle when they saw the militia retreat, only to be surprised by the Continental's volleys pouring into their disordered ranks.
Tarleton weakened his cavalry by splitting them up and trying to charge around both flanks. North Carolina militia bought a critical few minutes delaying the British charge around the American right flank. A mix up in orders created confusion on the right flank of the American line but the American infantry retreated in good order, reformed and counterattacked. In the meantime, William Washington's American cavalry kept together and outnumbered the opposing British cavalry 2:1 at every point of attack. Washington's cavalry was able to stop the British charge around the American's left flank, regroup and then ride around behind the American lines to charge and stop the British charge around the American's right flank. All this was done in just a few minutes. In fact the entire fighting probably only lasted at most 45 minutes.
Why did the British collapse? They were sleep deprived from the stop & go marching to the battlefield. They were wet & cold (the battle was fought in January). They didn't get enough food to keep up their body temperatures. The American rifle and musket fire staggered them. Finally 71st Highlanders were surrounded and surrendered.
Why did Morgan underestimate his numbers of troops & casualties? He didn't count the militia that fought with the Continentals, even though the militia played a key role in the battle. He did this in part as a propaganda tool to emphasize the importance of having a regular Continental Army in addition to the militia. Many southern political leaders didn't want to bear the expense of maintaining the Continental Army and wanted just to rely on militia. But Morgan's genius lay in his ability to get the most out of both the militia and the Continental Army.
If your idea of what the American Revolution in the South was like is based on "The Patriot", you'll learn a lot from this book. The battle scenes in "The Patriot" is a fictionalized combination of the Battles of Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse. This book tells it like it really was. And if your knowledge of the Battle of Cowpens comes from reading previous histories you'll learn that a lot of what you read was wrong.
This book is different than previous histories of Cowpens because the author tries to resolve questions like how many soldiers did General Morgan have, how many casualties did the Americans suffer, where were various units located, how did the chronology of the battle unfold, how long did the actual fighting last and why did Tarleton's forces collapse? To do this the author estimates numbers of troops, casualties and who fought at Cowpens from pension records and extrapolates numbers knowing that only a fraction of the soldiers who fought submitted a pension claim. He also uses instruction manuals from the period that specified various marching paces to estimate how far British & American troops could move during key points in the battle. Finally an understanding of the weather, marching conditions and lack of adequate food supplies, in addition to the effects of American rifle and musket fire and cavalry charges is necessary in order to understand why the British collapsed.
So what do we learn from all this? Dan Morgan was a tactical genius. He positioned his troops on the field to utilize marshy areas to protect his flanks and hinder cavalry operations. He positioned some of his lines at the bottom of a swale so that his troops could shoot up at British troops who stood out on the top of the hill against the sky while the British, who tended to shoot too high anyway, would have an even harder time shooting accurately downhill. Morgan arranged his Continental Regular troops so that the militia in front of them could retreat through the gaps in the Continental line to reform behind the Continentals without blocking their line of fire or disrupting their formations. Then the Continentals could close up their ranks after the militia passed through the gaps. The British thought they won the battle when they saw the militia retreat, only to be surprised by the Continental's volleys pouring into their disordered ranks.
Tarleton weakened his cavalry by splitting them up and trying to charge around both flanks. North Carolina militia bought a critical few minutes delaying the British charge around the American right flank. A mix up in orders created confusion on the right flank of the American line but the American infantry retreated in good order, reformed and counterattacked. In the meantime, William Washington's American cavalry kept together and outnumbered the opposing British cavalry 2:1 at every point of attack. Washington's cavalry was able to stop the British charge around the American's left flank, regroup and then ride around behind the American lines to charge and stop the British charge around the American's right flank. All this was done in just a few minutes. In fact the entire fighting probably only lasted at most 45 minutes.
Why did the British collapse? They were sleep deprived from the stop & go marching to the battlefield. They were wet & cold (the battle was fought in January). They didn't get enough food to keep up their body temperatures. The American rifle and musket fire staggered them. Finally 71st Highlanders were surrounded and surrendered.
Why did Morgan underestimate his numbers of troops & casualties? He didn't count the militia that fought with the Continentals, even though the militia played a key role in the battle. He did this in part as a propaganda tool to emphasize the importance of having a regular Continental Army in addition to the militia. Many southern political leaders didn't want to bear the expense of maintaining the Continental Army and wanted just to rely on militia. But Morgan's genius lay in his ability to get the most out of both the militia and the Continental Army.
If your idea of what the American Revolution in the South was like is based on "The Patriot", you'll learn a lot from this book. The battle scenes in "The Patriot" is a fictionalized combination of the Battles of Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse. This book tells it like it really was. And if your knowledge of the Battle of Cowpens comes from reading previous histories you'll learn that a lot of what you read was wrong.
January 18, 2020
Cowpens was one of the most decisive victory for American troops in the Revolutionary War. Bad Banastre Tarleton attacked the mixed militia-Continental forces under Daniel Morgan's command. The "Old Wagoner" schooled his dashing counterpart, Tarleton.
Morgan moved over ground to find the best ground for a fight. Cowpens (named for the cattle using the space) was his choice. The ground was not dramatically advantageous, but Morgan used the terrain very well to his advantage. He also understood the limited value of militia, who would often break and run at the first attack by the royal forces.
He put them at the front of his forces and asked them to do a minimal amount (a couple volleys) and then retreat behind other of Morgan's troops. Tarleton's forces got swept up with the sense of victory--but ran into much sturdier troops who started wrecking them. Tarleton used his cavalry to try to flank the American force--but were turned back by American mounted troops.
In the end, a major American victory. This is well detailed, well resourced, and well told!
Morgan moved over ground to find the best ground for a fight. Cowpens (named for the cattle using the space) was his choice. The ground was not dramatically advantageous, but Morgan used the terrain very well to his advantage. He also understood the limited value of militia, who would often break and run at the first attack by the royal forces.
He put them at the front of his forces and asked them to do a minimal amount (a couple volleys) and then retreat behind other of Morgan's troops. Tarleton's forces got swept up with the sense of victory--but ran into much sturdier troops who started wrecking them. Tarleton used his cavalry to try to flank the American force--but were turned back by American mounted troops.
In the end, a major American victory. This is well detailed, well resourced, and well told!
January 18, 2025
I remember my interest in the Battle of Cowpens began following my first viewing of the 2000 film “The Patriot” starring Mel Gibson. I had a fairly good, broad knowledge of the American War of Independence, but little specific knowledge of the Southern Theater of the war. Despite my general ignorance, I knew much of the film didn’t seem historically accurate. In the early days of the internet, I was still able to quickly discover the film was loosely based on the events surrounding the Battle of Cowpens on January 17, 1781.
Babits has performed admirable research on the battle and shares his findings in his account on the conflict. He meticulously reconstructs the sequence of the surprisingly short encounter(likely under an hour, probably much less. The details emerge to demonstrate the tactical brilliance of General Daniel Morgan. He used the notorious unreliability of militia forces as an advantage, by employing their greatest strength of using rifles to thin the British ranks, before their inevitable retreat. He established a second line to further bait the British into advance, which ultimately lulled them into a deadly encounter with the core of battle hardened regular Continental soldiers and dragoons(mounted soldiers serving in the capacity of cavalry during the American Revolution). This ambush devastated exhausted British ranks, resulting in a resounding American victory.
Other intriguing aspects of Babits’ study is on the campaign leading to the battle, the pension records of veterans of the battle, and the logistics that resulted in Morgan’s resounding success. For any American Revolution or military history reader, this is a fascinating book. Those without much knowledge on the period or 18th Century military history may find it challenging, but the book is short and Babits does a wonderful job of explaining terms and concepts that may be unfamiliar.
Babits has performed admirable research on the battle and shares his findings in his account on the conflict. He meticulously reconstructs the sequence of the surprisingly short encounter(likely under an hour, probably much less. The details emerge to demonstrate the tactical brilliance of General Daniel Morgan. He used the notorious unreliability of militia forces as an advantage, by employing their greatest strength of using rifles to thin the British ranks, before their inevitable retreat. He established a second line to further bait the British into advance, which ultimately lulled them into a deadly encounter with the core of battle hardened regular Continental soldiers and dragoons(mounted soldiers serving in the capacity of cavalry during the American Revolution). This ambush devastated exhausted British ranks, resulting in a resounding American victory.
Other intriguing aspects of Babits’ study is on the campaign leading to the battle, the pension records of veterans of the battle, and the logistics that resulted in Morgan’s resounding success. For any American Revolution or military history reader, this is a fascinating book. Those without much knowledge on the period or 18th Century military history may find it challenging, but the book is short and Babits does a wonderful job of explaining terms and concepts that may be unfamiliar.
October 28, 2022
Great account of the Battle of Cowpens. For those unfamiliar with this battle, the final battle in the movie The Patriot is a highly fictionalized combination of this battle and the battle of Guilford Courthouse. The author discusses the events that led up to this battle, then goes into a detailed discussion of the battle itself. The battle involved a few thousand American and British troops, with the main action lasting less than 40 minutes.
After marching most of the night, Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton sent his force into battle against a mixed force of militia, cavalry, and Continental Army soldiers commanded by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan. Morgan astutely used the terrain to his advantage, deploying three lines, the first of skirmishers, the second of militia, and the third of Continental troops, with his cavalry in reserve. The exhausted British were progressively weakened by these lines. The battle ended with a double envelopment, resulting in a mass surrender of British forces, with a cavalry pursuit of the remainder of Tarleton’s command, which effectively ceased to exist.
The author, Lawrence E. Babits, discusses and analyzes the makeup of the two armies, as well as their weapons and tactics. He then discusses the battle in detail, with an analysis of possible reasons (physical and mental fatigue) for the sudden British collapse.
If you’re ever in Northern South Carolina, visit the battlefield, which is beautiful and well preserved and can be toured in a few hours. And read this book for a good understanding of the battle.
After marching most of the night, Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton sent his force into battle against a mixed force of militia, cavalry, and Continental Army soldiers commanded by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan. Morgan astutely used the terrain to his advantage, deploying three lines, the first of skirmishers, the second of militia, and the third of Continental troops, with his cavalry in reserve. The exhausted British were progressively weakened by these lines. The battle ended with a double envelopment, resulting in a mass surrender of British forces, with a cavalry pursuit of the remainder of Tarleton’s command, which effectively ceased to exist.
The author, Lawrence E. Babits, discusses and analyzes the makeup of the two armies, as well as their weapons and tactics. He then discusses the battle in detail, with an analysis of possible reasons (physical and mental fatigue) for the sudden British collapse.
If you’re ever in Northern South Carolina, visit the battlefield, which is beautiful and well preserved and can be toured in a few hours. And read this book for a good understanding of the battle.
October 19, 2023
A well documented analysis of a pivotal battle of the American Revolution.
June 5, 2012
Don't make the mistake of thinking that you learned everything you might need to know about the American Revolution's Battle of Cowpens by watching the Roland Emmerich movie The Patriot (2000). I mention this only because the University of North Carolina Press edition of Lawrence Babits's A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens that I have before me bears across the bottom of the front cover a brief statement to the effect that Cowpens is "The real-life battle and heroes that inspired the movie The Patriot." Well, I suppose I can't blame the good people at Chapel Hill for doing what they can to rev up sales of any book; but as Babits makes clear in this fine historical study, the real Battle of Cowpens was much more complex and multilayered than what Emmerich presents in his film.
Babits, a maritime historian at East Carolina University, successfully ventures inland to document how effective planning and troop dispositions by Continental officer Daniel Morgan contributed to a resounding American victory over British forces commanded by Banastre Tarleton. Babits is painstaking in setting forth the tactical factors that would have been in the minds of officers and soldiers on both sides. Extensive maps of the battlefield enable the reader to follow the battle as it developed on virtually a minute-by-minute basis. Schematics of rifle design, tables of firing distances, portraits of leaders both Continental and British -- Babits is admirably thorough in bringing Cowpens to life. An epilogue even incorporates recent developments in "warrior science," discussing how fatigue and hunger might have caused otherwise elite British units to falter at the Battle of Cowpens.
Today, Cowpens is a national battlefield park, a short drive from Spartanburg, South Carolina. Reading Babits's book is a fine way to prepare for or reflect upon one's visit to the site of a battle that (even if it wasn't the Gettysburg-style decisive event dramatized in The Patriot) constituted an important turning point in the Southern campaigns of the American Revolution. A Devil of a Whipping is a perceptive study of an important military engagement.
Babits, a maritime historian at East Carolina University, successfully ventures inland to document how effective planning and troop dispositions by Continental officer Daniel Morgan contributed to a resounding American victory over British forces commanded by Banastre Tarleton. Babits is painstaking in setting forth the tactical factors that would have been in the minds of officers and soldiers on both sides. Extensive maps of the battlefield enable the reader to follow the battle as it developed on virtually a minute-by-minute basis. Schematics of rifle design, tables of firing distances, portraits of leaders both Continental and British -- Babits is admirably thorough in bringing Cowpens to life. An epilogue even incorporates recent developments in "warrior science," discussing how fatigue and hunger might have caused otherwise elite British units to falter at the Battle of Cowpens.
Today, Cowpens is a national battlefield park, a short drive from Spartanburg, South Carolina. Reading Babits's book is a fine way to prepare for or reflect upon one's visit to the site of a battle that (even if it wasn't the Gettysburg-style decisive event dramatized in The Patriot) constituted an important turning point in the Southern campaigns of the American Revolution. A Devil of a Whipping is a perceptive study of an important military engagement.
September 2, 2014
I had to read this for my Military History class. Definitely not something I'd read on my own, but it was interesting and informative. If you like detailed descriptions of battle and tactics, this definitely a good choice for you. Personsonally, I prefer character study over battle study. There is some insight into Gen Morgan's character and leadership style, but it's definitely more about the battle than its leader.
February 9, 2016
Solid military history, with some interesting minutiae about Revolutionary War soldiers. I'm afraid I cannot say the title of this book without snickering.
April 6, 2007
Nathanael Greene and Daniel Morgan are my heroes.
July 30, 2022
An immensely disappointing read. Cowpens was one of the decisive battles of the American War for Independence, and was crucial in reversing British ascendancy in South Carolina. But that momentousness is totally lost in this book. The author exchanges the gravity of the encounter for monotony and devotes an inordinate amount of space to minutiae, such as the average company size at the battle. Additionally, he seems unfamiliar with how to invoke primary sources. Primary source quotations should be included when they furnish a unique perspective on events. They should not be aimlessly strewn throughout the narrative. In this book, the author quotes primary sources in this manner:
“The fighting grew in intensity. Virginia rifleman Jeremiah Preston checked his cartridge pouch later and found he “fired 17 rounds.””
(Why not: “The fighting grew in intensity. Virginia rifleman Jeremiah Preston checked his cartridge pouch later and found he had fired 17 rounds.”
“A longer time is indicated by Johnson, who claimed it lasted “near thirty minutes.””
(Why not: “A longer time is indicated by Johnson, who claimed it lasted near thirty minutes.”)
“Lawrence Everheart was treated by Dr. Richard Pindell, who “dressed my wounds.””
(Why not: “Lawrence Everheart was treated by Dr. Richard Pindell.”)
There are scores of these superfluous quotations throughout the book. Their multiplicity and awkwardness make them appear as padding.
The most serious issue with this book, however, is that it fosters no emotional investment from the reader. It reads like a litany of quotes, minutiae, and troop movements. There is virtually no analysis—just tedious narrative. The ending is abrupt and leaves the reader wondering why the preceding events even mattered.
If you’re searching for an interesting account of Cowpens, this is regrettably not it.
“The fighting grew in intensity. Virginia rifleman Jeremiah Preston checked his cartridge pouch later and found he “fired 17 rounds.””
(Why not: “The fighting grew in intensity. Virginia rifleman Jeremiah Preston checked his cartridge pouch later and found he had fired 17 rounds.”
“A longer time is indicated by Johnson, who claimed it lasted “near thirty minutes.””
(Why not: “A longer time is indicated by Johnson, who claimed it lasted near thirty minutes.”)
“Lawrence Everheart was treated by Dr. Richard Pindell, who “dressed my wounds.””
(Why not: “Lawrence Everheart was treated by Dr. Richard Pindell.”)
There are scores of these superfluous quotations throughout the book. Their multiplicity and awkwardness make them appear as padding.
The most serious issue with this book, however, is that it fosters no emotional investment from the reader. It reads like a litany of quotes, minutiae, and troop movements. There is virtually no analysis—just tedious narrative. The ending is abrupt and leaves the reader wondering why the preceding events even mattered.
If you’re searching for an interesting account of Cowpens, this is regrettably not it.
August 21, 2022
While the Battle of Cowpens was relatively small, it had a major impact on the outcome of the American Revolutionary War. The extensive and detailed research by the author provides clear picture of the events at this battle. Cowpens was fought in January of 1781 in South Carolina. It is a fairly well-documented battle because it was recognized at the time as a turning point in the war. It was a turning point due to the extensive casualties suffered by the British. At that time, the Brits could not very easily replace lost soldiers due to the distance across the Atlantic Ocean. In addition, the author included extensive research in the pension records of American survivors of that battle. This pension records detailed what units the pensioner fought with, what wounds (if any) he received and where and when those wounds were received. At the time of pension application such details were necessary to approve the pension request. Today, these records help the author to locate the American units on the battlefield and know at what point they received the British assault and were the wounds associated with cavalry, infantry or artillery attacks. The author presents a compelling case for how American General Daniel Morgan out generaled British Colonel Banastre Tarleton. Tarleton had a reputation for being ruthless and effective, yet Morgan wisely used Tarleton’s aggressive nature against him. Morgan’s purposeful retrograde movements enticed Tarleton to chase him expending the energy and supplies of British troops. Thus, the Brits attacked at dawn after an all-night march into an area that Morgan chose to receive the British attack. Morgan’s selection of the ground on which to fight and preparation of his troops to receive the British attack made all the difference per the case laid out by the author.
January 27, 2022
Lawrence Babits does some intriguing research and uses his process of deduction to reach back and see what really happened in the Revolutionary War battle. This was a turning point in the war and an outstanding example of the genius of Daniel Morgan as well as the alert actions of his top officers. Babits goes beyond what many researchers see as an American victory in a key battle with innovative tactics. Without digging deeper as he did, you would not understand the critical role played by the militia rifleman units, the Continental infantry generals and the Cavalry/Dragoons under Colonel Washington. The battle could have been unhinged in several moments had any of these units failed to do their job. A very clear picture of the way battles were fought in the Revolution, very different from the movies. A worthwhile investment in your Revolutionary War library.
January 8, 2020
This book could easily be rated between 3 and 5 stars depending on what you want out of a history of Cowpens. This is not a general history, Babits goes into almost interminable detail of the terrain, weather, phases of the battle etc etc calculating how far this unit would have advanced and how that translates into the varying accounts. For historical nerds this is great and his conclusions balanced and well thought out, marrying together the various accounts and explaining discrepancies between them.
June 3, 2021
This scholarly examination of the Battle of Cowpens is indispensable to students of the Revolution for whom no detail or minutiae is uninteresting, but it is not the book that those with a more casual interest should choose. The author's impressive deep dive into the history draws upon not only the primary sources, but also archeology and evidence derived from recreations and reenactors. For anyone who already has a solid understanding of the history of the Revolution and still has a Cowpens itch that needs scratching, this is the book for you.
April 11, 2023
A bit detailed, but I like that! The narrative includes a lot of quotations from the battle participants, giving a good sense of being in the action. There is more detail than most battle books about individual units, down to the company level. This may turn off readers with a casual interest. I have an ancestor who fought at Guilford Courthouse and I am hoping to be able to use Babits's book of that battle to follow in his footsteps.
May 13, 2018
A finely-researched study of a pivotal battle of the American Revolution, but is a slight victim of “information overload,” which makes it a fairly dry read. Still, it’s an indispensable book for Revolutionary War study. Grade: B+
December 10, 2019
Great detail about a pivotal battle in the American Revolution.
Well explained analysis of the battle. Good minute by minute recount of the fighting.
I look forward to walking the battlefield to match the book to the land.
Well explained analysis of the battle. Good minute by minute recount of the fighting.
I look forward to walking the battlefield to match the book to the land.
December 13, 2022
Although not a large book, it is by far an exhaustive look at all aspects of the battle of Cowpens. In fact, it reads like a PhD dissertation. While I gained some fabulous insights into the battle, at times, the book became laborious to read.
January 18, 2024
A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens is an excellent book about the American Revolution. Each of the nine chapters highlights a different phase of the battle. This book answered all my questions about the struggle and included many maps and charts. Highly recommended.
April 29, 2024
The level of detail in this book is incredible. Excellent information on the context leading up to the battle and then why it was the beginning of the end for the British. If you want detail down to the smallest unit size, this is the book for you.
May 10, 2024
Well written
Exhaustive research, compelling analysis, the author has done his homework and comes to believable conclusions. For a military history, it is a surprisingly easy read and well worth the effort.
Exhaustive research, compelling analysis, the author has done his homework and comes to believable conclusions. For a military history, it is a surprisingly easy read and well worth the effort.
September 28, 2017
A very academic treatment of the subject with lots and lots of names, statistics, titles, ranks, and dates. Sometimes difficult to get through.
June 15, 2018
One of the first military histories of the War for Independence to make extensive use of the pension records in the National Archives. Exceptional book.
January 2, 2020
Solidly researched academic book on a small but critical battle in the Revolution.
August 15, 2021
Good read
At times too much detail. Would appreciate a glossary of terms. Some present day maps would enhance the reader’s interest.
At times too much detail. Would appreciate a glossary of terms. Some present day maps would enhance the reader’s interest.
October 16, 2022
Great book, awesome research, great writing
November 1, 2022
Great research!
Good read on an important battle! Very well researched and presented. Highly recommended to any student of the War of Independence.
Good read on an important battle! Very well researched and presented. Highly recommended to any student of the War of Independence.
January 18, 2023
This is a very valuable book for anyone wanting to know more about the battle or for a scholar to improve the volume of their reading on the topic.
December 11, 2023
An outstanding battle study based on painstaking research. Babits, starting off on an archaeological survey, has produced a very thorough account of a very short, though decisive, battle.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews