Men of Fire: Grant, Forrest, and the Campaign That Decided the Civil War

by Jack Hurst

Deep in the winter of 1862, on the border between Kentucky and Tennessee, two extraordinary military leaders faced each other in an epic clash that would transform them both and change the course of American history forever. Brigadier General Ulysses S. Grant had no significant military successes to his credit. He was barely clinging to his position within the Union Army-he had been officially charged with chronic drunkenness only days earlier, and his own troops despised him. His opponent was as untested as he was: an obscure lieutenant colonel named Nathan Bedford Forrest. Forrest was a slaveholder, Grant a closet abolitionist-but the two men held one thing in common: an unrelenting desire for victory at any cost. After ten days of horrific battle, Grant emerged victorious. He had earned himself the nickname “Unconditional Surrender” for his fierce prosecution of the campaign, and immediately became a hero of the Union Army. Forrest retreated, but he soon re-emerged as a fearsome war machine and guerrilla fighter. His reputation as a brilliant and innovative general survives to this day. But Grant had already changed the course of the Civil War. By opening the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers to the Union Army, he had split Dixie in two. The confederacy would never recover. A riveting account of the making of two great military leaders, and two battles that transformed America forever, Men of Fire is destined to become a classic work of military history.

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

464 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2006

Reviews

[Jaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book wasn't just a description of the battles at Forts Henry and Donelson, but also described the behind the scenes intrigues on both sides of the Civil War. Hurst described the frustrations and tribulations that both Ulysses S. Grant and Nathan Bedford Forrest faced during their campaigns. The focus of the book was on the Forts Henry and Donelson campaigns, but Hurst did an excellent job describing the events leading up and after the campaigns. He also gave an epilogue of how each person fared after the War until their deaths. This was interesting and well-written.

[Gerry · Rating 3 out of 5]

The long title is Men of Fire: Grant, Forrest, and the Campaign That Decided the Civil War. The book doesn’t live up to its hype. The Forts Henry-Donelson Campaign was a successful operation which opened up Tennessee and places south to invasion via river, and leveraged Confederate commander Albert Sydney Johnston’s army out of Nashville; but there is no explanation of how the whole war itself was decided then and there. Robert E. Lee was not consulted at the time.

It is a good history of the campaign itself and the author is supportive of General U.S. Grant. Villains of the piece are General Henry Halleck (Grant’s superior), General McClernand (whom I believe merits another look), and one William J. Kountz, a steamboat magnate who ran afoul of Grant, never a good thing.

As with the Union, the Confederacy has its heroes and villains. Colonel Nathan Bedford Forrest’s famous career got its start here. He did well, and then at Nashville, but nothing he did decided the whole campaign one way or t’other. He gets covered and is in the subtitle mainly as a way of adding “sizzle” for the customer. Confederate Generals Floyd, Pillow, and Buckner didn’t do so well and author Hurst presents a good luck at this hapless trio.

The real value of the book is in its detailed coverage of the campaign itself. There aren’t as many books on this campaign as there, say, of Gettysburg (but a Google search provides some pleasant surprises). The attempted breakout under Pillow’s command on February 15th gets a thorough play-by-play and that’s worth the price of admission. Its maps I wish would have delineated the objective roads more clearly.

Worth reading.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’ve been extremely negligent in by Civil War reading, I have all but ignored the West. I read this account of the Battles of Forts Henry and Donelson in an effort to begin correcting my deficiency and I picked an excellent place to start. The battles amongst Federal generals over who does what and who is in charge of who sound more like high school then high command and made me wonder how the Federals could have possibly won the war. Once the discussion turned to the Confederate generals my question was soon answered.[return][return]The only problem I had with the book was the title. Hurst really concentrates on Grant, Forrest doesn’t get much more mention then any of the other generals involved. This is understandable since this was really Grant’s show and Forrest was only a Lieutenant Colonel at the time and didn’t really play a major role. Hurst also never explains the title's claim that this was the campaign that decided the Civil War. Without these battles Grant would have probably been relieved and would therefore not have been around for his later victories which actually did decide the war. This campaign also alienated Forrest from the Confederate high command and prevented his being given important commands later in the war that could have influenced the war’s outcome. I don't think you can say this campaign decided the war based on these two facts, but Hurst doesn't present any others to support the claim. In spite of these minor issues I highly recommend Men of Fire.

[The Angry Lawn Gnome · Rating 3 out of 5]

On the whole an interesting work, but not without its weaknesses. First, Forrest gets short shrift vs. Grant in terms of the narrative, second I don't think Hurst proves that the Pillow/Donelson battles "decided" the Civil War, and finally, I personally had a hard time following his blow-by-blow description of the battles. That last maybe is a failing of mine, but oh, well.

I'm also a bit skeptical that Halleck was quite the bucket of scum Hurst paints him as. Not that he wasn't grossly unfair to Grant, of course, but Hurst really goes to town on him. This is the first place I've ever read allegations that Halleck essentially made up a story in hopes of relieving Grant...and I've read quite a few Civil War books in my time.

Still, kind of an interesting hypothesis underlies the book, one I'd never considered. If I'm not quite convinced, I must admit to being at least a bit intrigued.

[Nathan Eberline · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were a number of elements I enjoyed from “Men of Fire” The content that focused on Grand and Forrest was insightful and interesting. I took from the description that there would be more comparing and contrasting of the two generals, but it was probably a 3:1 ratio of Grant content to Forrest content with plenty in between. It almost felt as if there was a tug-of-war contest between the author and the editor/publisher on what the book should be. The descriptions of the battles and the solider movement at times hit the theme of the book’s extended title and did so with the richness so often found in David McCullough’s books (which I view as the pinnacle for historical books). At other times, it felt closer to the bottom paragraphs of an AP news release—important details yet a bit prosaic.

Still, I gained a far better understanding of the Civil War’s western front and how it fit into the larger campaign and the war’s outcome. I would recommend this book for Civil War buffs, but I would steer new explorers of the Civil War to other books. “Team of Rivals” and “Killer Angels” are two that come to mind for a novice. Or it may be wise to start with one of Hurst’s earlier books, which I have not yet read.

[Jquick99 · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly recommend.

If you have any interest in reading/learning about "the unkempt little man in the blue brigadier general's coat", you've GOT to read/listen to this.

And the foe of this Honorable General is The Ultimate Bad Guy...a very cruel plantation owner, slave trader and [allegedly] a Grand Wizard in the very early years of the KKK. His recruiting motto was “Come on boys if you want a heap of fun and to kill some Yankees!”

The author does go into the minutiae of the Battle of Ft Donelson, so if that gets boring, I suggest to skip ahead to around the 10 hour mark of the audio.

[Carmen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is hyper focused on a very specific set of 2 battles during the Civil War in Tennessee. The book brings to a head the two men commanding on either side and how they happened upon that position. I thought it would be a more broad story of these two men than it was. I am woefully ignorant of many of the specifics in regards to the Civil War and was hoping for a more broad overview. If you enjoy books about particular battles or U.S. Grant you may enjoy this book.

[Mark · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read re the taking of Forts Henry and Donelson. The author, who wrote a biography of Nathaniel Bedford Forrest, tried to use him as one of the hinges of the tale. It didn’t work. Forrest was a minor player in the two battles. This was Grant against Pillow mainly.

[Helen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read Grant but this gave me a better over view of battles at Ft Henry and Donnelson here in our region. It also gave me some background about Forrest.

[Jeff Currie · Rating 4 out of 5]

More Grant than Forrest focused - though the overall cast is huge, of course. I'd never known about the winter warfare on the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers that led up to Shiloh and Grant's rise in stature as a general who would take the initiative in battle. That meant he had a war mentality - not reluctant to shed the blood of his men to go on the offensive. But not lacking in sensitivity to his men or the opponents. And not reluctant to be in the midst of the battle himself, which counts for something.

The events of that February in 1862 were amazing and dreadful. Armored gunboats versus shore batteries for the first time in history. Not a gentle February either. Days or weeks of below freezing temps and rain/sleet/snow for the men involved, many of whom had shed overcoats and blankets due to mild weather on the march to the main action around Fort Donelson.

The aftermath - panic and flight among Nashville's residents, 13,000 or more Confederate prisoners to send to prisons in the north, and Grant's promotion to major general - were important reminders that things keep happening after the battle is won. No comfortable "endings" to human stories - in war or in peace.

Jack Hurst conveys a lot of information in a highly readable (listenable for me, actually) way.

[Karen K - Ohio · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an excellent in depth look at the battles of Fort Henry and Fort Donelson and how their capture helped split the Confederacy in two. The grim horrors and miseries of battle are covered in detail. Not sure why the author included Nathan Bedford Forrest in the title of his book, although both men were aggressive leaders, Forrest had no significant involvement in either battle. The book covered in great detail the tumultuous relationship Grant had with his superior Henry Halleck and the cooperative partnership Grant had with Foote and his revolutionary ironclads. It also showed the disorganization, in-fighting and jealousies rampant on both sides of the conflict.

[Camille · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a good overview of the Fort Henry and Donelson campaign, but it didn't talk about what was to come in the future campaigns that pitted Grant against Forrest. I also wish that it would have gone a bit more in depth about Halleck and his attempts to undermine Grant in the Western Theatre. I didn't learn much that I didn't already know, but it provided more detail about the capture of the two forts and their strategic importance in having control of the Cumberland River.

[Ray · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the interest of saving time (mine), I agree with Camille's 6/03/09 review, which states, in part:
"This was a good overview of the Fort Henry and Donelson campaign, but it didn't talk about what was to come in the future campaigns that pitted Grant against Forrest. I didn't learn much that I didn't already know, but it provided more detail about the capture of the two forts and their strategic importance in having control of the Cumberland River."

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Appreciate the importance of this campaign after reading this book, and causes serious wonder why the battle for Donelson never receives any depictions in many books or movies? Appreciated Hurst's details and accounts that walked through events day by day. The book does cover many strategic level and political topics in the background, and the lack of a strategic level map is something missing. Book also doesn't cover Forrest in the same depth as it does Grant as the title suggests.

[Scott Archer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Better than the mediocre reviews indicate. This book is almost entirely about Grant and Fort Donelson and only secondarily about Forrest, Buckner, Pillow, etc. I had already read several books that covered Fort Donelson, so I did not enjoy it as much. If you are looking for an exhaustive treatise on Ft. Donelson, this is for you.

[Straw · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm really thinking this should be 2 1/2. The writing was consistent but plodding. The political machinations overtook a lot of the action and often led me to doze off during the read. However, I am left knowing a great deal more about the capture of Forts Henry and Donelson.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent book especially since I live in west Tennessee. My great great grand father fought under Grant's command. His brother was killed at Vicksburg Mississippi. So it is nice to get a feel for what my ancestors lived through. I also know the area very well.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

Little too dense for me. I found I had trouble picturing the battles in this audio version. I guess I need maps!

[Rick]

I got a few hours into the audiobook, but had too hard a time focusing on what was going on with the war, and stopped. Maybe I'll try it in print sometime.

[Travis Reno · Rating 2 out of 5]

way way way too much detail for my taste. I got about half-way through and had to bail.

[Anna · Rating 2 out of 5]

very dry reading.