The Longest Night: A Military History of the Civil War

by David J. Eicher

Drawn from archived reports, letters, and journals from soldiers and civilians, an authoritative volume presents a military survey of the Civil War, detailing a wealth of engagements, from Fort Sumter to Gettysburg, and covers such topics as prisons, health care, clandestine operations, railroads, emanicipation, and the participation of African Americans. 25,000 first printing.

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

992 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 2001

Reviews

[Gerry Connolly · Rating 5 out of 5]

In The Longest Night David Eicher has produced a one volume 1,000 page compendium of every major and most minor battles of the Civil War. The research is thorough if the style is plodding. In each combat exchange there is a recitation of the respective military officers, an account of battle deaths, wounded, missing and captured and a physical description of army or naval placements. Action is rarely exciting even when outcomes are. Eicher deserves credit for understanding that Scott’s original Anaconda plan worked, strangling Southern ports and inland waterways. In four years the Union built the largest navy and army in the world. It crippled the Confederate economy and, with the fall of Vicksburg, cleaved it in half. It also prevented European recognition of the CSA. A noteworthy and scholarly effort.

[Brent · Rating 4 out of 5]

A magnum opus of a tome from one of the most prolific and astute Civil War historians, Eicher presents an impeccable piece of historical scholarship in his 'Longest Night.' In a standard chronological model, Eicher goes into vivid detail historically, and practically, of the Civil War happenings on both sides of the war. Drawing from impressive primary sources, and sound historical scholarship, Eicher has written a must read for any serious historian of the American Civil War. A must read, indeed.

Brent M. McCulley (10/17/13)

[Charles M. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must reference book for any Civil War buff! Great companion to McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom". All the battle maneuvers, generals and their personalities are compiled in this exhausting study of just about every battle/skirmish during the Civil War.

[Ken Lang · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an exceptional read, especially for those who want a good summative description of the numerous points of the Civil War. I have found this book to be a great resource for finding specific events from the Civil War and having a quick description of events.

[Kyri Freeman · Rating 3 out of 5]

A one-volume military history of the Civil War, encyclopedic in its detail.

This would probably work best if used as a reference work rather than a book to be read from start to finish -- an undertaking I think most readers will find impossible. The level of detail, including lists of armories and types of ammunition, is daunting.

I finished the book with a number of concerns.

Firstly, Eicher is not a professional historian but an astronomer, and while that certainly doesn't disqualify him from making a valid scholarly contribution, it does make me a little cautious about his credentials.

It's ironic that Eicher chooses to criticize the "dated" prose style of Bruce Catton. LONGEST NIGHT is written in a style that is so dry that I think even highly motivated readers will have trouble getting through the book. Some of Catton's theories may be dated today, but his prose continues to make the Civil War come alive, something that cannot be said for Eicher's.

I found various minor errors in the book, ranging from an oddly skewed version of the Battle of Port Republic to a mistaken source for Jeb Stuart's nickname, and I wonder if, since I found errors on topics I've studied, if there may be greater problems lurking in the background. As well, it's not always clear why Eicher chooses to discuss some events in exhaustive detail and not others -- returning to the cavalry as one example, why give all of John Hunt Morgan's raids in exhaustive detail, but accord almost no discussion to Stuart's rides around McClellan? Perhaps my most serious concern, though, is with Eicher's frequent attribution of emotional states to historical figures without any supporting evidence. For example, he describes Longstreet as "grumpy" at Gettysburg, Lee as "desperate", Mosby in 1864 as "in a sour mood". Especially given that Eicher tries to causally connect these moods with the military actions of the people in question, it worries me quite a bit that he cites no supporting dispatches, letters, diaries or memoirs.

Eicher offers somewhat limited analysis, sticking mostly with a recitation of facts; he does state that he feels it would have been impossible for the Confederacy to win the war, but doesn't, in my opinion, offer convincing arguments why not.

I recommend this only with reservations; there are better, and more enlivening, books in print.

[Gerry · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's just what it says it is: a military history of the war, with only such politics as are really necessary, such as Antietam's impact on the Emancipation Proclamation and the capture of Alanta's effect upon the 1864 presidential election. The big fights are obviously there, but the author also covers smaller actions such as occurred in the Trans-Mississippi theater and throughout the country. Didja know J.E.B. Stuart actually got good and licked once in 1861? at Dranesville, Dec. 20, suffering 194 casualties to the Yankees' 68. The author is quite precise with casualty counts throughout; I suspect he had many conflicting reports but made the best decisions he could. There is much good information on how the armies and navies were organized, weaponry, blue- and brown-water naval actions, and more. There is little of the political maneuverings within the high commands; the book is long enough. There are decent maps of the battles but campaign maps are lacking. Overall, readers who have read Foote or Catton won't find too much new, but the book does serve as a good reference when details are needed.

[Jimmy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty good overview of the entire war. While those people who have numerous books on individual campaigns (like I have) are unlikely to learn much that is new from this book, the author does a good job covering the major operations of the war (including several campaigns in the Trans-Mississippi).

[Shannon · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fairly solid military history of the American Civil War, blessedly free of any Lost Cause crap. Good read all around, if a bit of a slog because of the sheer volume and denseness of information.

[Richard Walden · Rating 5 out of 5]

A true 'magnum opus' and a marvelous reference book if you need to know stuff like who commanded what division in whose corps in what army. I works as a great supplement ot McPherson, Catton, etc.

[Jerome Otte · Rating 4 out of 5]

A straightforward, well-researched military history of the Civil War. Eicher has a good command of the subject matter and he covers every major campaign and battle in detail (and even some minor skirmishes, such as the ones that predated Bull Run). Although the Virginia theater is often viewed as decisive, Eicher painstakingly covers all theaters and does a fine job putting them all into their strategic context. The maps are clear and detailed.

Eicher does cover such issues as medical procedures, weapons and prisoners of war, but these are scattered throughout the book rather than dealt with in separate passages or chapters, which may annoy some. Also, Eicher often seems to want to play revisionist when it comes to classic works like Catton and Foote, and often critiques their versions, sometimes unconvincingly, and some statements are unsupported. Eicher does not cover historical debates in much detail. Also, the writing is rather dry and choppy, although Eicher is capable of vividly conveying tragedies like Fort Pillow or Sand Creek. Also, the book often seems more like a reference work than an analytical history. Eicher also criticizes both sides for using outdated tactics inappropriate for the era of rifled muskets, even though battlefield communication had not improved much since that weapon’s introduction. Some of these discussions are also inserted in somewhat random places. He also seems to credit Beauregard for the Confederate victory at Shiloh, even though Johnston probably deserves more of the credit (he also writes that Johnston led attacks during this battle).

A solid, useful and broad if not particularly well organized work.

[William Purves · Rating 4 out of 5]

Second read. Very detailed account of military operations in the ACW.

[David Withun · Rating 3 out of 5]

-

[Jamie Campbell · Rating 5 out of 5]

As with "A World Undone," (which deals with WWI) this book is an excellent example of a one volume popular history.